The Social Context Hypothesis - Essay Example

Cultural Influences on Intelligence and Personality I. Introduction Nature versus nurture has been the quintessential debate of topics about the origins and sources of personality and intelligence. Individuality or the distinctness and uniqueness of a person depend on both heredity and the rules and norms of the society where he or she belongs to. Rules and norms of society comprise the culture of a society. Culture is defined as a set of unique or distinguishing spiritual, intellectual, emotional and material attributes of a social group or a society (Culture). It includes lifestyles, value systems, beliefs, traditions, ways of living together, and art and literature. The question now lies on the issue of whether culture or the environment has a stronger influence on personality and intelligence than heredity. Nature comprises the genetic or biological makeup of a person, while Nurture is how an individual is raised, what kinds of environment he or she is raised in, and who raised him or her. It is definite that individuals inherit certain mental and physical characteristics from their biological parents. They inherit physical traits such as eye color, height and predisposition to physical diseases or ailments. The mental traits which could be inherited include the susceptibilities to mental disorders or even mental dispositions to a certain extent. Are there traits and characteristics which people develop as outcomes of the environments where they were raised? To what degree are the effects manifested by the individual? These manifestations are observed in intelligence and personality. Environmental influences have emerged to be in equal importance to genetic elements in the determination of intelligence and other facets of personality. The social context hypothesis maintains that people from different social groups behave differently because context-restricted interpersonal relationships and group norms affect behavior (Malloy, Albright, Diaz-Loving, Dong, & Lee, 2004). People belonging to a society and thus share one culture, have the greatest tendency to share similar behaviors, points of view and perceptions about things, events and relationships. They share the same experiences, learn uniform ideas and concepts, and undergo similar learning processes and methods. People sharing the same culture also view the same things and events as significant or important because of the perceptions they share which they learned in the context of their culture. II. Influences of Culture on Intelligence Intelligence may be defined in several ways. It is the ability to attain success in life based on personal standards within a socio-cultural context. The ability to realize success is dependent on a person’s strengths and his or her ability to compensate for the perceived weaknesses. Success is achieved by maintaining a balance of creative, analytical and practical abilities. The balance of these abilities should be achieved so a person may better shape, adapt to and select environments (Sternberg, 2002). These abilities are also dependent on the opportunities available to individuals. Generally, people from the upper socio-economic level in society have more opportunities than those from the lower socio-economic level. Individuals who have access to a variety of learning materials and learning venues have a greater chance of intellectually excelling. Someone who has finished college has better career opportunities than one who has dropped out of school because of financial difficulties. Thus, the measure of how well individuals shape, adapt to and select environments should be viewed with respect to the opportunities available to them (Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2004). The meanings and measures of success differ from one culture to another. Groups of people perceive success differently. Different cultures place value or significance in different things or concepts. One element of society may be important to a group of people, but may be insignificant to another group. Therefore, success cannot be measured by a single method or instrument across different societies or cultures. The development of intelligence in a person entails the integration of social norms and values with academic learning. This integration determines the standard for success or failure, along with encouragement and punishment. In line with this argument, intelligence as a determinant of success cannot be measured across cultures by using one standard of measurement. Interpretations based on one mode of testing would yield invalid results because of the diversity of cultures. If given the same kind of test or questionnaire, students or test takers from differing cultures would fare differently because the focus of their learning is different. The results would most probably come out discrepant because of the different values individuals place on achievement or intelligence. A primary concern with administering the same test across cultures would be the language used. A culture or group may be knowledgeable in using the English language, but they have different concepts or meanings to a word as compared to other groups. One word may have several meanings across groups or societies. Intelligence is considered hereditary where biological factors originating from the biological parents affect or result to the degree of intelligence of a person. While intelligence is in part innate in people, the environment and the social context where a person is raised greatly affects or influences an individual’s intelligence. The natural intelligence of a person may be altered by improvement or hindrance by the environment. Environment refers to the physical and social environment which includes social relationships, norms, perceptions, traditions and physical elements of the location of the society or group. Intelligence to a great extent is dependent on the socio-economic status of an individual in reference to the society where he or she belongs to. Individuals from the lower economic or financial status develop certain characteristics in their culture which allows them to adapt to their financial situation or crisis. They tend to place crucial value on financial matters like how to earn a living and practical things to do to generate money, instead of academic endeavors. A culture where success or achievement is measured not in terms of educational or academic attainment emerges. Individuals from the lower economic bracket do not fare well in academics because of things they cannot immediately control. These deprivations include fewer learning resources, less parental assistance, less privacy for studying, lower quality of schools, poorer role models and less motivation to intellectually excel (Intelligence: The Influence of Heredity and Environment). III. Influences of Culture on Personality Personality refers to the distinct patterns of feelings, thoughts and behaviors that result to the uniqueness of a person (Van Wagner). Personality is consistent where the behaviors of individuals are regular or they react in similar ways to different situations. It influences how we react and respond to the people, incidents and events in the environment and is the cause of certain actions. Personality is manifested in feelings, relationships, thoughts and other social interactions. The aim of studying personality and culture is to form an understanding of the growth and development of social or personal identity as it interacts with the social environment (Barnouw, 1963). Certain classifications of personality emerge because of the common elements that bind individuals who are members of a certain group affirming a specific culture. Culture more often than not is described based on the characteristics of the members and the similarities they share. Studying the interrelations of culture and personality uses both the fields of psychology and anthropology. The societal behaviors of individuals or members within cultures aid in the analysis of the effect or influences of culture on the personality structures of individuals. Behaviors, predispositions, emotional and physical reactions and responses of individuals are rooted in the way of life and the actual experiences within their cultural or societal group. Observations of how other members behave and react, specifically the immediate family members, predispose individuals to pattern, if not totally copy these actions, and adopt them as their own. An example could be the difference between the Western and Asian cultures. Generally, in Western societies, people are more achievement and competition-focused. They tend to be individualistic and they value personal effort. Asian cultures are less individualistic and are inclined towards interdependence. They value cooperation, devotion and loyalty. Membership in social groups is important to them. These groups provide motivation and encouragement, and are sources of the patterns of behaviors. The personality differences can be accounted for by the diversity of cultures. Ways of living and the principles governing the everyday functions in society create the differences in the personalities across different cultures. IV. Comparisons of Intelligence and Personality Test Results Across Cultural Groups The accuracy of the comparison of intelligence and personality test results across different cultural groups may be questioned as to the basis of the comparison used. Getting the similarities or the constant factors in the test results from the different cultural groupings would lack in precision because of the different underlying elements affecting the outcome of the tests. The administration of the tests may be consistent regardless of the cultural groupings, but the distinct value systems and thought mechanisms of the individuals are different. Vast variations in general viewpoints and concepts would result to varying interpretations. These differences in interpretations may be expected because each individual is unique though they belong to the same culture. But extreme differences in interpretations based on conflicting or far different world views would result to invalid readings of the test results. Meaningful interpretations of test results are in most part dependent on the homogeneity of the group. In the case of intelligence and personality tests, extreme or opposite ends cultural heterogeneity distracts the accurate interpretation of the data or the test results. The act of establishing or determining the benchmark of success in the tests is in itself culture based as it reflects the importance of a certain standard or value. One culture may value academic learning more than anything else as a measure of intelligence, while another culture may refer to the more practical knowledge and abilities like social interaction as the determinant of the level of intelligence. The preferred types of personalities are likewise dictated by culture. A culture may certain personality types as being the most desirable, while another culture may consider these personality types as delinquent or unpleasant. V. Implications of these Comparisons Comparisons of intelligence and personality test results are more effective if based on a culturally homogenous group or set of participants. The interpretations would be more accurate and meaningful because the standards used are all applicable to the individuals who participated in the tests. Comparing results of intelligence and personality tests across different cultural groups would result to discrepancies in the interpretations as a single benchmark used may be irrelevant to a particular culture. Interpreting a group or a cultural classification as being successful or failures compared to the other groups would be unfair because the standards of success and failure and the means to attain these concepts are different among the cultural groups. The theory of relative functionalism is also a factor in the analysis of test results. An example is the study made on why Asians excel in Academics more than any other racial groups. The study was specifically made in the United States where Asian Americans were noted to achieve beyond their measured IQ. Relative functionalism is the pursuit of opportunities for achievement in specific contexts like academic and social when other avenues to gain success are closed (Suzuki & Arinson, 2005). To interpret the high achievement in academics of Asians in the United States based on the relative functionalism theory is to cite the status and the limited opportunities afforded to Asians in the United States. Their achievement in academics is a means to adapt to their environment and to compensate for an important element in their culture. This element is the value of integrity and the value of determination to succeed against the odds facing them. VI. Conclusion Genetic or Biological factors contribute to the personality and intelligence of each person. This is proven fact based on studies made by scientists or medical scholars and researchers. On the other side of the fence, there are proponents of culture being the main contributory factor in the shaping of individual personality and intelligence. They also have studies to back up their theories. There are however more advocates of culture as the central influential factor in the development of intelligence in personality. These advocates do not discredit genetics, as they acknowledge that there are certain aspects of intelligence and personality that can be attributed to the biological aspects. There are internal physiological mechanisms in the human anatomy that indicates the hereditary factors. Traditions, beliefs, norms, views, ways of living and the patterns of social interaction which form the core of culture, shape the personality of a person. Observations, learning processes within the family and society and actual experiences are the means of enculturation. The favorable or desirable personality types differ from one culture to another because of the different value systems and standards per culture. Intelligence is likewise determined by cultures as the principles behind which abilities to consider valuable and important are distinct to cultures. Not all cultures value academic achievement or success in school in terms of getting high grades and getting certificates. Some cultures value formal schooling as a means to develop intelligence but some cultures put more significance in the development of practical skills like social interaction and adjustment, and informal learning processes. The diversity of cultures makes the process of comparing intelligence and personality test results across cultures inaccurate and meaningless. Differences in the principles and concepts behind intelligence and personality hinder a correct and truthful comparison of test results of individuals belonging to different cultures. A descriptive analysis of the results acknowledging the differences in culture makes the test results more meaningful and significant to the individuals who participated and to their families. The analysis should be made separately and distinctly with recognition of the major differences of cultures. The basis or standard of interpretation is in itself culture based so all conclusions arising from the interpretations of results should be deemed not absolute in all cases. References Barnouw, V. (1963). Culture and Personality . Illinois: The Dorsey Press. Culture. (n.d.). Retrieved Sep 17, 2007, from United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization: http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/ev.php- URL_ID=13031&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html Intelligence: The Influence of Heredity and Environment. (n.d.). Retrieved Sep 17, 2007, from Spark Notes: http://www.sparknotes.com/psychology/psych101/intelligence/section3.rhtml Malloy, T. E., Albright, L., Diaz-Loving, R., Dong, Q., & Lee, Y. T. (2004). Agreement in Personality Judgments within and between Nonoverlapping Social Groups in Collectivist Cultures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 30, No. 1 , 106-117. Sternberg, R. J. (2002). CULTURAL EXPLORATIONS OF HUMAN INTELLIGENCE AROUND THE WORLD. Retrieved Sep 17, 2007, from Center for Cross-Cultural Research, Western Washington University: http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~culture/Sternberg.htm Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2004, Aug 11). Intelligence and Culture: how culture shapes what intelligence means, and the implications for a science of well-being. Retrieved Sep 17, 2007, from The Royal Society: http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/content/hrx5mdwfcknpwx22/fulltext.pdf Suzuki, L., & Arinson, J. (2005). The Cultural Malleability of Intelligence and its Impact on the Racial/Ethnic Hierarchy. Retrieved Sep 17, 2007, from University of Delaware: http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Suzuki-Aronson-commentary-on- 30years.pdf Van Wagner, K.(n.d.). What is Personality? . Retrieved Sep 17, 2007, from About.Com: http://psychology.about.com/od/overviewofpersonality/a/persondef.htm Read More